HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Minutes - 04/15/2003 COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES
APRIL 15, 2003
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Council President Judy Woods, Connie Epperly, Leona Orr,
Julie Peterson, Bruce White
STAFF PRESENT: Dena Laurent, Fred Satterstrom, Tom Brubaker, Charlene Anderson, Jackie
Bicknell
PUBLIC PRESENT: Tina Mankowski,Rocky Piro, Eli Cooper
The workshop was called to order at 5:05 P.M. by Council President Judy Woods.
Harborview Medical Center Community Relations
Tina Mankowski, from Harborview Medical Center, said she had been going out to city council
meetings all over King County to acquaint people with Harborview Medical Center, a county owned
facility managed by the University of Washington. She stated that Harborview was a teaching and
research facility that has been located in Seattle, at various locations, since 1877. Ms. Mankowski
handed out a brochure with information on the various programs Harborview offers, as well as a brief
history of its beginnings, and plans for how the hospital will go forward into the future. She also
gave a Power Point presentation. Harborview's net operating budget is about $365 million a year and
they provide with that $36 million in charity and non reimbursed care. Harborview is a regional
referral center for Washington, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho and is the only Level I Adult/Pediatric
Trauma Center in the four state region, and the disaster control hospital for the Seattle/King County
. area. Recently, a Spiritual Care Program was added where clergy and lay ministers are trained in
how to work in traumatic situations. Harborview attracts nearly$45 million in research each year, a
of which is in the neurosciences/trauma/HIV-AIDS areas. Ms. Mankowski said she would like to
come back in a year or so to show what Harborview has been doing with the tax dollars.
Puget Sound Regional Council Vision 2020 Outreach Urban Centers
Rocky Piro, Growth Management Section, Puget Sound Regional Council, handed out a packet of
information pertaining to the Puget Sound Regional Council. (Please refer to this handout, in the
packet, for additional information) The Growth Management Policy Board desires to increase
communication with jurisdictions containing Regional Growth Centers—both
manufacturing/industrial and urban centers. He described the purpose of the Urban Centers,
presented statistics on housing unit and employment changes within designated centers, and outlined
the GMPB work program for updating "Vision 2020". "Vision 2020" outlines transportation
investments, programs, and economic strategy for implementing the growth management vision for
the Puget Sound region. It calls for a development plan of urban centers connected by a multimodal
transportation system. Part of the overall transportation strategy in the region is to recognize more
and more that what is happening with land use and development not only impacts transportation but
is part of transportation. Centers are seen as the key spinal nodes in a regional system and definitely
appropriate places to be making major investments and supporting what's happening with planning
efforts.
Eli Cooper, PSRC, discussed further the two slides in the packet relating to Urban Center Housing
Unit Growth and Urban Center Employment Changes. With the concentration of jobs in the Urban
Centers,there's a lower percentage of people driving than would normally be found in a non centered
location and that's where the elimination of automobile trips and how the centers land use strategy
helps respond to some of the transportation issues in the region. There are still a large volume of
people driving to the locations, but the way people get to the centers is impressive when looking at
the regional overall average: somewhere between 2-3% of all trips are transit trips. Rocky Spiro
M added that the center's concept was envisioned or integrated into the regional plan in 1990,
reemphasized in 1993, and then the countywide policies, when they were developed, added some of
the carrots and sticks of what it means to be a center. A big chunk of the federal money has been
prioritized to go to the urban centers.
Legislative Update
Assistant Chef Administrative Officer Dena Laurent pointed out a couple of items on Doug Levy's
Week 13 Report. She said the primary issues before the legislature now relates to budget which
includes the capital, transportation, and operating budgets for the State of Washington. The Senate
moved their capital budget last week. Staff has talked to the senators about the funding level they
have for the Washington Wildlife Recreation Program at $40 million.
• HB2197 and HB2198 (I-790 fixes)have been passed out of the Senate Ways and Means
Committee. We had a lot of concern about whether or not implementation of Initiative 790
would require significant additional retirement benefit costs to the city. It appears something
will happen this session to remove the section of language out of the initiative that would
have us incurring those costs.
• Transportation: Discusses the difference between the House and Senate Transportation
packages. The House version is very good except that it does not contain the 167 corridor
funding of 9 million for planning future expansion of 167. In the House version where there
is dedicated funding for freight projects we would be receiving about 8 million dollars in
funds for our 228`h Project. The down side of the Senate package is there is no dedicated
funding for freight projects. If the Senate is not going to do a line in their transportation
• budget called freight, maybe they will do a list of projects and that's the approach we've taken
in communicating with them.
■ SSHB2228-Commute Trip Reduction. A striker provision is being considered to this bill
which would make CTR Programs voluntary. It would also remove funding for programs to
local communities and that funding we use and we use it very well. Doug Levy will be letting
our legislators know that that is not something we would be comfortable with.
■ ESSB5777. This is a bill regarding health care access for public agency retirees. We had an
opportunity this morning to communicate to representatives on the House Health Care
Committee the challenges that the city is facing in complying with the legislative intent of this
bill. When the bill was originally passed it was thought it would be no problem for self
insured cities to go out to the private market to secure a plan that would be about the same
cost like COBRA and should be cheaper than buying your own if you are a retiree and the
cities would merely be a conduit for that provision of health insurance. That's not what we're
finding. Sue Viseth has worked very hard because the private sector has not been
forthcoming with an alternative and it is something that's of great concern to self insured
cities. Not by any means this isn't something we aren't committed to doing but that it isn't
the easy thing that was purported to be in the legislative intent that was expressed during
hearings. Maybe there is something our legislators can do to help us with this.
I have scheduled our"Thank You to Legislators"for the first meeting in June.
The workshop adjourned at 5:55 p.m.
Council Office
2"d Floor,City Hall
220 4'h Ave.South,Kent,98032
PLEASE SIGN IN
DATE: C�-
Name Address Phone Number
aim- 12 t�v. b
lt,c-u 7
EOM 1'XJ1 AVQz-